“You Will Be Harassed and Detained”

Media Freedoms Under Assault in China Ahead of the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games

I. Summary

This is the way the business is [in China]-if you
go to some area where they are nervous about foreign journalists, you will be
harassed and detained.

-David Barboza, New
York TimesShanghai
Correspondent, Shanghai, June 25, 2007

In December 2006
the Chinese government unveiled new temporary regulations designed to give
accredited foreign journalists expanded freedoms in the run-up to and during
the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing.
That decision appeared to mark a significant easing of the tight official
controls on reporting activities that have long constrained foreign
correspondents' freedom of expression in China. Most accredited foreign
journalists, however, say the new regulations in force since January 2007 are
being persistently flouted.

This report
analyzes how the Chinese government is failing to fulfill its commitments to
respect the reporting freedom of foreign correspondents during the period of
the temporary regulations and is instead continuing to subject foreign
reporters to detention, harassment, and intimidation. It also examines how the
Chinese government maintains a stranglehold on the activities of domestic
journalists-intentionally excluded from the new temporary regulations-and
strictly censors local reporting to comply with official propaganda objectives.

The Chinese
government's assurances of wider media freedoms during the Olympic Games were
key to the International Olympic Committee's 2001 decision to allow Beijing to host the Games.
At that time, Wang Wei, secretary-general of the Beijing Olympic Games Bid
Committee, promised international media "complete freedom to report when
they come to China" for the 2008
Olympic Games.

The new freedoms
for accredited foreign journalists in China are set out in the "Service
Guide for Foreign Media," published on the website of the Beijing Organizing
Committee for the Olympic Games.That document states that "the regulations on Reporting Activities by
Foreign Journalists shall apply to the coverage of the Beijing Olympic Games
and the preparation as well as political, economic, social and cultural matters
of China
by foreign journalists in conformity with Chinese laws and regulations." The
temporary regulations, which are in effect from January 1, 2007, through
October 17, 2008, allow foreign journalists to freely conduct interviews with
any consenting Chinese organization or citizen.

On paper, the
temporary regulations appear to free foreign correspondents from a decades-old
regulatory handcuff of time-consuming and rarely granted foreign ministry
approval for interviews and reporting trips outside of Beijing
and Shanghai (where
the bulk of the 606 accredited foreign correspondents from 319 foreign news
organizations are based). However, the new latitude granted by the temporary
regulations is conditioned on being "in conformity with Chinese laws and
regulations." This is problematic, as many Chinese laws and regulations limit
free expression. The continuing applicability of these other laws and
regulations and the lack of independence of the judiciary limit the chances
that the temporary regulations will be enforced, or enforceable.

Some of the 36 foreign correspondents we interviewed or
whose written accounts of their experiences were provided to Human Rights Watch
said that their experience of the new temporary regulations has significantly widened access to sources and
topics previously taboo, such as access to certain prominent political
dissidents and to villages with public health emergencies. Some have said they
have received assistance from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs when
harassed or detained in the midst of reporting activities.

Such outcomes are encouraging, yet they are the exception
rather than the rule. Many foreign
journalists who have tested them say the regulations are being ignored or
denied. In addition, foreign journalists must still apply for rarely-granted
official permits for reporting visits to Tibet. Worse, many say that they are
often harassed, detained, and intimidated by government and state security
officials in the course of their reporting activities. More disturbingly, such
treatment is increasingly being meted out by threatening and occasionally
violent groups whom journalists often suspect to be plainclothes police
personnel: the groups frequently appear to work in cooperation with government
and uniformed police officials, but routinely refuse to identify themselves or
provide identification. Foreign reporters are noting an ongoing pattern of "the
use of anonymous thugs to enforce the will of local governments," as one Beijing-based
correspondent put it.[1]

The violations of
reporting freedom reported since January 1, 2007, have been experienced most
often by foreign correspondents pursuing stories related to topics of perceived
extreme sensitivity by the Chinese government, including coverage of political
dissidents, Tibet, the country's HIV/AIDS epidemic, and issues of "social
stability"-specifically riots and their aftermath. However, foreign journalists
have also reported harassment, detention, or intimidation during or after
coverage of topics ranging from visits to state-owned factories to conditions
at China's
zoos.

Alarmingly, some
correspondents said that China's
Ministry of Foreign Affairs has itself engaged in intimidation tactics in the
wake of reporting that the ministry judged unfavorable to the Chinese
government. In one case, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs actively pressured a
foreign news agency based in Beijing to scuttle coverage
of a "sensitive" topic by one of its bureaus outside China. The ministry retaliated by
refusing a work visa when the news agency refused to comply.[2]

Harassment,
intimidation, and detention since January 1, 2007, have instilled fear in many reporters.
They have lingering concerns about potential repercussions on their work visa
status and how their employers may react to news of their problems with Chinese
officials.

Chinese
journalists and Chinese nationals who are assistants, researchers, translators,
or sources for foreign correspondents face even more danger, as they are
explicitly excluded from the freedoms granted to their foreign counterparts
under the temporary regulations. Chinese journalists interviewed by Human
Rights Watch said that their activities remain closely monitored by state
security agencies to ensure that their reporting does not stray from that of
the official propaganda line, which is a major restraint on their reporting
freedom.[3] One local assistant of a Beijing-based
foreign correspondent has become the target of tightening surveillance and
pressure from at least two security organs of the Chinese government, which has
extended to harassment of the assistant's family following the publication of a
story about dissident couple Hu Jia and Zeng Jinyan.[4]

Consequently, the
vast majority of foreign journalists interviewed by Human Rights Watch
requested that their identities and those of their employers not be mentioned. Chinese
journalists interviewed by Human Rights Watch also required anonymity to
prevent possible retaliation by the security services. In one case, Human
Rights Watch was specifically asked by the colleagues of one local reporter to
not contact that individual due to concerns that she was already under close
surveillance by security officials.

The explanation for the disparity in experience and opinion among
journalists often seems to be related to variables including luck in contacting
sympathetic foreign ministry officials during office hours and the willingness
of local officials to duly comply with ministry requests that the temporary
regulations be respected.

Violations of the
letter and spirit of the temporary regulations raise troubling questions about the freedom of expression
and the security of the thousands of journalists[5] expected to come to Beijing to cover the 2008 Olympic Games. Failure
to deliver the promised expanded reporting freedoms for foreign reporters
during the temporary regulations period means that, at best, those journalists
will continue to face severe obstacles to reporting adequately on topics that
the Chinese government would prefer the international media ignore. At worst,
the ongoing official obstruction of independent reporting by foreign
journalists may force foreign journalists into state-controlled media tours
that provide skewed, sanitized depictions of China divorced from the country's
complex realities. This would deal a severe blow to hopes-based on the Chinese
government's promises to the International Olympic Committee of expanded media
freedom during the 2008 Games-that the Olympics would lay a long-term
foundation of greater transparency and reporting freedom for foreign and
Chinese journalists alike.

Human Rights
Watch urges the Chinese government to enforce the implementation of the
temporary regulations on reporting freedoms for foreign journalists and to end
the practice of harassment, detentions, and intimidation that they currently
face in the course of legal reporting activities. Human Rights Watch supports
the possibility raised by Cai Wu, minister of the State Council Information
Office, that the temporary regulations may be made permanent after October 17,
2008.[6]

Human Rights Watch also urges the Chinese government to extend those same
rights to Chinese journalists and to make media freedom for foreign and Chinese
journalists a permanent component of Chinese law in line with Article 35 of the
Constitution of the People's Republic of China, which guarantees freedom of
the press.

These measures are essential to ensure the freedom of expression and the safety
of the thousands of foreign journalists expected to cover the 2008 Olympic
Games in Beijing.
Failure to implement them raises serious doubts about the Chinese government's
willingness to live up to its explicit commitments to the International Olympic
Committee for expanded reporting freedom. Such a failure also indicates that
the Chinese government continues to stifle discussion of urgent issues such as
corruption and illegal land seizures, which are causing serious unrest across
the country. By limiting journalists' coverage, the Chinese government
continues to deny the troubling realities of widespread human rights abuses, a
widening urban-rural income gap, and severe environmental degradation, in an
effort to promote a particular image of the country during the run-up to the
Olympics. It remains urgent that the Chinese government recognize that a free
media is an essential foundation of the social stability, development, and
justice that the leadership claims to strive for.

II. Background:
Longstanding Constraints on Media Freedom in China

The development
of a free media in China
is critical to providing its 1.3 billion citizens with a realistic
understanding of the challenges facing their rapidly transforming society as
state control of some aspects of economic and social life steadily loosens. A
free media is critical to the ability of the Chinese people to exercise their
fundamental rights of expression and to be fully informed about developments in
their society-be they political, social, economic, or environmental-that have
direct bearing on their lives.

International
Standards of Media Freedom

Freedom of the
press is a fundamental principle of international human rights law. The media
play a crucial role in exposing abuses of power, human rights violations,
corporate malfeasance, and medical and environmental crises, thus helping to
ensure that the public is informed, that abuses are halted, that criminal perpetrators
face justice, and that victims can seek redress. Pivotal international instruments
place great emphasis on the importance of a free press, such as the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights (Article 19), and the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights (Article 19.2),[7] a key human rights treaty that China has
signed but not ratified.

The most detailed
exposition of the rights and responsibilities of journalists and a free media
is found in the United Nation's Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization (UNESCO) Declaration on Fundamental Principles concerning the
Contribution of the Mass Media to Strengthening Peace and International
Understanding, to the Promotion of Human Rights and to Countering Racialism,
Apartheid and Incitement to War.[8] Among other things, the Declaration calls
for:

-public access to information, "Thus enabling each
individual to check the accuracy of facts and to appraise events objectively."
(Article. II.2)

-journalists' freedom to report (Article II.2)

-protection for journalists "guaranteeing them the
best conditions for the exercise of their profession." (Article II.4)

-a free media as a tool in human rights education:
"The mass media have an essential role to play in the education of young people
in a spirit of peace,

justice, freedom, mutual respect and
understanding, in order to promote human rights, equality of rights as between
all human beings and all nations, and economic and social progress. Equally,
they have an important role to play in making known the views and aspirations
of the younger generation. (Article IV).

The Constitution
of the People's Republic of Chinaincorporates the spirit of the importance that the international
community ascribes to media freedom through Article 35, which guarantees "freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly,
of association, of procession and of demonstration."

Comprehensive Censorship and
Control of the Chinese Media

The decades-old
system of stringent government control over domestic media, effectively
rendering the bulk of China's media news content components of a vast national
propaganda system, remains mostly untouched by the "reform and opening"
initiated by former Chinese Communist Party Chairman Deng Xiaoping in 1979.Domestic news content in China is painstakingly filtered
through outright censorship of material deemed objectionable by the Communist
Party and a web of rules and regulations that strictly limit the reporting
scope of journalists. Chinese journalists are also given financial incentives
to maintain this status quo.[9]

III.
Harassment, Detention, and Intimidation of Foreign Correspondents Despite the
New Regulations

Some reporters have noted improvements since Jan. 1.
However the FCCC is concerned about continuing instances in which foreign
correspondents have experienced interference, or their Chinese assistants and
sources have been intimidated. Since Jan. 1 a number of international
journalists have been summoned by the Foreign Ministry for reprimands over stories
run by their respective news organizations. Many foreign correspondents believe
China has not yet lived up
to the promises made by Beijing
authorities of complete media freedom during the Olympic Games period.

-Melinda Liu, president of the Foreign Correspondents Club
of China, July 9, 2007[10]

A minority of the correspondents interviewed by Human Rights
Watch or whose testimonies were provided to Human Rights Watch by their
employers or via the Foreign Correspondents Club of China (FCCC) indicated that
the implementation of the temporary regulations since January 1, 2007 has
delivered meaningful expanded reporting freedom.

Several correspondents noted that since January 1 they have
been allowed long-denied access to interview certain political dissidents,
including Bao Tong, a former top aide to disgraced former Chinese Communist
Party Chairman Zhao Ziyang and the most senior official jailed over the 1989
Tiananmen protests. The security officials who enforce Bao's house arrest have
permitted Reuters, the Straits Times,
the Economist and the South China Morning Post to visit him.

Lindsey Hilsum of the United
Kingdom's Channel 4 News likewise tested the new
regulations earlier this year and said that initial official opposition to an
interview with the village chief in Xiditou, one of China's
"cancer villages" outside of the eastern port city of Tianjin, evaporated when the local propaganda
secretary confirmed that the new regulations permitted the interview. "So for
the first time in his life, the village chief of Xiditou sat in front of a
camera and was quizzed about the fact that the villagers are dying of cancer
and his factory is amongst those blamed and he wouldn't have before January
1," Hilsum wrote in the June FCCC newsletter.

An accredited Beijing-based photographer with a foreign news
agency also said that the implementation of the temporary regulations has
resulted in a measurable loosening in the restrictions on subjects he can photograph.
On at least one occasion since January 1 the photographer received access to a
facility that officials there attributed entirely to the new temporary
regulations. "[The officials] said the only reasons we were allowed to [get
access] is the new regulations and that before, even if they'd wanted us to
visit, there'd be no permission from [relevant government units]," the
photographer said.[11]

These instances in which foreign journalists' have
experienced an expansion in reporting freedom have hinged on both local
authorities' awareness of the temporary regulations, and, more importantly,
their willingness to respect them.

However, the majority of the foreign correspondents
interviewed by Human Rights Watch or whose accounts of their experiences were
provided to Human Rights Watch indicate a widespread disregard and denial of
the new reporting freedoms granted to foreign reporters by the temporary
regulations implemented as of January 1, 2007.

A.
Harassment by Government, Party, and Security Officials

We will always be subjected to harassment by local officials. The difference
now [with the temporary regulations] is that [when it happens] we can at least
now call a guy at the Ministry of Foreign Affairsbut it doesn't do much for
access to information or the capacity to work freely.

Many of those to
whom Human Rights Watch spoke or about whom we received information indicated
that the new temporary regulations have done little to temper the reflexive
inclination of government, police, and state security officials to harass and to
obstruct the legal reporting activities of foreign correspondents in China. That
harassment ranges from close surveillance by government and/or security
officials, to demands that the journalists cease their reporting activities and
immediately leave the area in which they are working. Foreign correspondents
say the close surveillance is intended to both monitor reporters' activities as
well as to silently intimidate them and their sources.

A long-time foreign correspondent said she and her colleagues have been
harassed due to their coverage of political dissidents in early 2007 and of the
highly-publicized murder of Chinese journalist Lan Chengzhang in Shanxi province on
January 10, 2007 (for her experience of detention and interrogation in
connection with covering the Lan case, see below).[12] Soon after, the correspondent had
difficulties in renewing her work visa, among other problems she attributes to
intentional state security interference. She told Human Rights Watch, "I know
the stories we have done have angered [the Chinese government] and my visa
renewal problems began after [those reports]We started experiencing internet
connection difficulties."

The intimidation
tactics worked. Concerned about the degree of official scrutiny her work had
attracted and worried that more punitive sanctions such as the cancellation of
her work visa could follow, the correspondent opted to not complain to the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs about her experiences in the hope that the
intimidation would eventually ease.[13] (For other journalists' experiences with
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and what they interpret as the threat to their
visa and work permit status, see sub-section D, below.)

Some foreign
correspondents have discovered that the freedom granted in the temporary
regulations period to access and interview political dissidents results in not
less but rather more intense surveillance, harassment, and intimidation of
themselves or their local assistants after their coverage is published or
broadcast. The attempts to cover mass protests and riots remain particularly
problematic for foreign journalists.

Government,
police, and state security officials have also harassed foreign reporters
trying to cover stories ranging from approved visits to state-owned factories,[14] corporate press conferences,[15]a visit to one of Henan provinces infamous "AIDS villages,"[16] and petitioners seeking official redress
for grievances during the National People's Congress in Beijing.[17]

What should have
been a relatively straightforward corporate story for a Beijing-based newswire
reporter in March illustrates the difficulties that foreign correspondents face
in receiving the legal protection promised by the new temporary regulations. During
a previously arranged visit to a state-owned factory, the correspondent was
confronted by an individual who identified herself as a member of the factory's
Chinese Communist Party cell, denied any existence of the new temporary
regulations, said the very existence of the entire factory was a "state secret,"
and demanded that the correspondent leave.The correspondent contacted the Ministry
of Foreign Affairs for assistance, which lessened the party cadre's opposition,
but didn't completely remove obstacles to reporting efforts.

Eventually we got the interviews and the access we wanted, but the [Party
cadre] tried to limit what we filmed-even workers packing boxes-or who we could
talk to and tried to limit our time in each place [in the factory]. What
surprised me was it was a [factory] not [a
story about] dissidents, it was a business interview, so it was the last place
we expected to run into something like this."

The journalist also noted that
the interviews were all closely monitored, ensuring that workers could not have
freely expressed their views without concerns about repercussions.[18]

Harassment of foreign correspondents who report on issues of China's HIV/AIDS epidemic in Henan province, common prior to
implementation of the new temporary regulations, continues to impede
journalists' reporting efforts in those areas. A Beijing-based foreign
correspondent attempting to conduct an interview with an HIV/AIDS sufferer in Henan in January was
interrupted by two policemen who intruded into the interview and did their best
to eavesdrop.

[The police]
said they were "neighbors" and were dressed-down in plainclothes, but had
pullovers that said "Police." [First] they stood outside in the courtyard and
during the interview one or two of them entered, then tried to stand outside
the door [of the room where the interview was taking place] but were shooed
away.[19]

A reporting trip
to the city of Xian
in January 2007 to look into suspected trafficking of an executed convict's
organs resulted in a Beijing-based Associated Press correspondent attracting
the attention of plainclothes police who tailed her throughout much of the
second day of her two-day visit and interrogated her taxi driver about her
activities in Xian.

I asked them to
identify themselves but they ignored me and the apparent leader [of the two men]
said to my driver, "We'll talk to you later." The driver said later that they
had asked him what I was doing in Xian and how I knew him and said they were
state security officers.[20]

This harassment
is a worrying indicator of the types of hazards that the thousands of
accredited foreign journalists who are expected to cover the 2008 Olympic Games
in Beijing may
have to endure unless the Chinese government takes strong, effective action to
eradicate such violations of reporting freedom. Foreign journalists cannot
effectively report when government, party, and security officials have them
under close surveillance, disrupt their interviews, or refuse to respect the
new temporary regulations on reporting freedom. The foreign journalists
preparing to cover the Beijing Olympic Games will expect that the rights being
upheld in the new regulations will be respected.

B.
Harassment by Plainclothes Thugs

The aim is
intimidation and fear, and it works.

-Beijing-based foreign journalist, Beijing, June 15, 2007

Perhaps more
disturbingly, foreign journalists in China have told Human Rights Watch that
they note an increasing frequency of harassment and intimidation by bands of
occasionally violent individuals who appear to operate openly and unrestrained
by Chinese government and security officials.[21] Numerous foreign correspondents told
Human Rights Watch they suspected that plainclothes police constitute the
majority of such groups, but are unable to conclusively identify them as such
because the individuals routinely decline to identify themselves. Such tactics
are increasingly common in China,
with local governments and private companies using them to disperse protesters,
intimidate political dissidents, and instill fear among opposition of any kind.

The correspondent
who encountered visa renewal problems, described above, said that the use of
such thugs, whether plainclothes police or not, reflected a growing level of
sophistication in Chinese security forces' efforts at distancing identifiable,
uniformed police from acts of harassment and intimidation, particularly at
protest demonstrations related to forced evictions in Beijing.

It's now
common to deal with two to three types of "policemen," including private
security guards who act like police. There are a lot of plainclothes [security
officers] taking still and video images at the scene [of protests]. A couple of
weeks ago we went to a working neighborhood which was the scene of the biggest [residential
area] demolition in Beijing.
In the crowd a guy approached me in plainclothes and said, "Are you [name
withheld]?" I said, "How do you know my name?" But he just walked away.[22]

Normally such
personal identification could only be done by an actual member of the police.

Natalie Behring,
a Beijing-based photographer for France's Sipa Press, was harassed
for a full day in March 2007. Behring was followed by a group she suspected to
be plainclothes policemen in four to six black Audi sedans in and around a
small village in Henan
province during a reporting trip about a Chinese serial killer who had been
executed three years previously. Behring said the harassment by the men, who
consistently declined to identify themselves, seemed to be aimed at both her
and her local sources. Behring said the full day of harassment ended with her
and her colleague being briefly detained by the police backed by the group of
suspected plainclothes officers.

The minute we
got there [to the village] we realized we were being followed. The village was
surrounded by these da-ge [hoodlum]
types in black polyester shirts. It was intimidation for sureall of these cars
followed us all day. They just followed us, intimidated us all day, then
grabbed us at the end of the day."

That intimidation
included closely monitoring her efforts to talk to and photograph sources in
the village, taking aside one of her key informants for what Behring suspected
was an effort to convince the man not to cooperate with Behring, as well as
following her and the informant to the grave of one of the serial killer's
victims.[23]

An abusive group
whom journalists suspected were plainclothes police but who never identified
themselves also made an appearance during journalists' attempts to cover the
efforts of petitioners from the countryside seeking redress at one of the petitioning
offices of the Letters and Visits system[24]in Beijing prior to and during the annual
meeting of the National People's Congress, China's legislature, in March. Petitioners
are ordinary Chinese citizens permitted by national and local regulations to
raise grievances at Letters and Visits offices including on topics of extreme
sensitivity to the Chinese government, such as police brutality, corruption, or
illegal land seizures. Petitioners who attempt to visit the large Letters and Visits
offices in Beijing
during annual meetings of the National People's Congress have been the focus of
increasingly violent action by police and plainclothes thugs who attempt to
force the petitioners to return to their countryside homes.

Two journalists reported
separate episodes of being manhandled and harassed by suspected plainclothes
officers who repeatedly pushed and shoved the journalists and denied them
freedom of movement as the journalists attempted to leave the scene. This was near
China's Supreme Court, in a
part of central Beijing with some of the
tightest security in China,
but uniformed police looked on and did nothing.[25] One of the journalists, an Associated
Press photographer, said she narrowly avoided being abducted by plainclothes
thugs on March 1 while documenting petitioners:

When we
were making our way out of the area followed by petitioners, a police car sped
to the spot where we were, blaring its siren, followed by two unmarked cars.
Five plainclothes police that didn't identify themselves came out of the
unmarked cars and tried to push us into the vehicles. We resisted and
petitioners helped to pry us loose. We tried to keep on walking, but continued
to be blocked, pushed, handled and shoved by the plainclothes police, who gave
us no explanation as to why they were stopping us. The police [from the marked
police car that accompanied the vehicles carrying suspected plainclothes
officers] denied knowing who the [plainclothes] men were, although they stood close
by while we were questioned [by police] yet again.[26]

Foreign
journalists have refrained from launching official protests of such abuses for
reasons ranging from skepticism about the utility of any such action, to fears
of possible retribution from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the form of
problems with work visa renewal. The Foreign Correspondents Club of China has
recently conducted a survey of its membership about the implementation of the
temporary regulations since January 1 and issued the results of its findings on
August 1, 2007.

C.
Illegal Detention of Foreign Correspondents

They led us to a
military compound and brought us to a roomand interrogated us for about an
hour. We were scared because we started to think we'd fallen into the hands of
some kind of mafia [because] the situation seemed fake, not official. This was
definitely not a police station. We [later] thought it was a clever way of
detaining [journalists] without officially detaining them.

The new temporary
regulations have also failed to end the practice of detaining reporters engaged
in legal reporting activities. Since January 1, 2007, foreign journalists have
reported detentions at the hands of persons ranging from local government
officials and police, to plainclothes thugs and even employees of a toy
factory.

In some cases,
foreign correspondents' phone calls to officials at the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs have resulted in their relatively quick release. In other cases,
release from detention was a less satisfactory process.

James Miles, China correspondent for the Economist, was detained in January by government officials at an HIV/AIDS-stricken
village in Henan
province who denied any knowledge of the temporary regulations and informed him
that he would have to leave the area immediately. Miles called the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs and within an hour he was released and allowed to continue his
interrupted interview. But Miles said that victory did not change the attitude
or tactics of government officials in that village toward foreign journalists:

A week later a
Japanese journalist showed up in the same village and the same rigmarole [of
harassment and detention] occurred. The officials denied [knowledge of] the
regulations, the journalist called the Ministry of Foreign affairs [for help]
but it was a Sundayso he left without a story.[28]

Bruno Philip, China
correspondent for Le Monde, had a
similar reception in May while reporting on the aftermath of riots in Guangxi
province. The riots had been sparked by mass opposition to punishments against
violators of China's
one child policy. After being closely followed by two individuals he suspected
were plainclothes policemen (due to their more formal style of dress compared
to the residents of the town, who were overwhelmingly farmers and dressed
accordingly). Philip and his Chinese assistant were briefly detained in a
government building in the village by uniformed police who refused to
acknowledge the new temporary regulations.

Philip called the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs for assistance and within 10 minutes the ministry official
dealing with him assured Philip that the situation had been "sorted out and I
was free to move wherever I wanted." But in fact the local officials continued
to block Philip's efforts to report on the riot's aftermath

I was told I
could interview representatives of the [local] government, but not people in
the street, so I asked, "Who can I talk to?" They said, "We don't know." Then I
asked, "When can I talk to them?" Their response was "We don't know." So I gave
up and left.[29]

The Beijing-based
foreign correspondent trying to report on the Lan Chengzhangmurder in Shanxi province (see
above, sub-section A) was detained and interrogated in early 2007 in a compound
with signs that identified it as a military facility rather than a police
station. The presence of only one policeman in the company of a sinister group
of men whom she suspected may have been plainclothes police or soldiers made the
encounter appear more like a mafia-style operation than an official
investigation:

It looked dodgy
because there was only one [uniformed] cop and the rest were plainclothes guys
in a military compound. We told them about the new regulations for [foreign]
journalists and one of them replied, "Those don't apply here, go back to Beijing." I think their
purpose was to scare us.[30]

In some
instances, even police and government officials are unable to assist
journalists detained by representatives of private companies. TheNew
York Times Shanghai-based correspondent David Barboza, his Chinese
assistant, and a photographer were detained for more than 10 hours by staff at
a factory in Dongguan, Guangdong province, on June 18 while doing a
story about toxic lead paint discovered in the factory's US exports. Barboza
eventually secured his release from the factory after writing a short statement
explaining the reason for his factory visit and stating that he hadn't asked
for permission to take photographs.

The police and
the [local] government couldn't get us released, so if I hadn't signed that
thing, who knows what would have gotten us out of there. The police had nothing
to say, they were silent, like security guards. All the terms [of our detention
and release] were dictated by the factory bosses.[31]

D. Intimidation by China's Ministry of ForeignAffairs

It was a
warning. It was an attempt to make you think twice about writing about things [the
Chinese government] doesn't likean attempt to pressure you.

While some
foreign correspondents interviewed by Human Rights Watch praised the Ministry
of Foreign Affairs for timely intervention in cases of harassment and
intimidation by local government officials and police. Other foreign
journalists said that the ministry has reacted to the freedoms granted by the
new temporary regulations by practicing post-publication intimidation tactics
or overtly trying to influence the editorial decisions of foreign news
organizations.

Since January 1,
2007, at least seven foreign journalists have been called in for meetings at
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Beijing
to receive what the correspondents say are implicit warnings about the tone or
content of recent reporting. Or, in one case, an explicit demand to alter
overseas coverage of what the ministry considered a "sensitive" topic.[32]

The Foreign
Correspondents Club of China has never surveyed its members about the frequency
of foreign ministry reprimands of foreign journalists, so comparative data is
lacking about whether there has been an increase in such incidents since the
implementation of the temporary regulations on January 1. But several long-term
foreign correspondents suggested that anecdotal evidence indicated that the
frequency of such incidents has increased sharply in the first six months of
2007.

While
correspondents uniformly describe the foreign ministry reprimands as
perfunctory, tightly-scripted encounters, their implicit threat value is
extremely high. Foreign journalists are acutely aware that their annual work
permit renewals are at the ministry's discretion and that any expression of
ministry displeasure at their work may be a forewarning of possible visa
trouble. The most recent reprimands also coincide with a period of apparently heightened
job insecurity among print media journalists internationally (due, for example,
to cutbacks linked to falling advertising revenues). Such journalists are thus
particularly sensitive toward anything that could be interpreted as a negative
comment on their performance that their employers could perhaps use to help
justify the journalist's recall. Foreign journalists are also aware that
international news agendas that place an increasingly higher premium on China
coverage may be willing to sacrifice the concerns of individual journalists
rather than jeopardize requisite longer-term good relations with the Ministry
of Foreign Affairs.

One Beijing-based foreign journalist told Human Rights Watch about having
been called into the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in June to hear complaints
that a story he wrote about prominent dissidents Hu Jia and Zeng Jinyan had
"ignored improvements in China's
human rights record." The journalist said that the ministry's actions reflected
its concern at the reporting freedom granted to foreign correspondents by the
new temporary regulations. "With these new rules, it's a new situation and [the
Chinese government] doesn't know how to respond. I suppose [the complaint] was
a form of intimidation."[33]

Geoffrey York,
the China correspondent of Canada's Globe
and Mail newspaper, was called in to face Ministry of Foreign Affairs
complaints on April 30 about a story he'd written about the lawyer of Canadian
religious leader Huseyin Celil, who had been sentenced to life imprisonment in China
on terrorism charges earlier that month.[34] The Celil case has caused a diplomatic
rift between Canada and China for several reasons, not least because the
Chinese government refused to allow Canada consular access to its
citizen. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs also expressed concerns about a story York had written on April 26 about a report by the
nongovernmental human rights organization Human Rights in China detailing systemic discrimination and
poverty afflicting China's
ethnic minorities, especially Tibetans and the Uighur Muslim minority in
Xinjiang.[35]

A prepared
text in Chinese was read to me and translated into English. [Ministry
officials] gave the official line about Celil and China's
justice systemand alluded to the Human Rights in China pick-up [story] about ethnic
minorities. There are certain red lines [on news coverage] like "terrorism" in
Xinjiangand anyone who covers those stories and strays from the official line
attracts attention. [The encounter] was ritualistic, but it was a warning.

York
said he did not challenge the ministry's reprimand because he had been
specifically warned by fellow correspondents that the ministry was extremely
sensitive to how foreign correspondents reacted during such encounters.[36]

A producer for a foreign television news crew was summoned to the Ministry
of Foreign Affairs on June 4 to face complaints about a story that linked the
2008 Olympic Games in Beijing to the "national
disgrace" of China's
zoos.[37] "They didn't like the link to the
Olympics and something very critical of China," the correspondent said.[38]

More alarming is
the recent effort of China's
Ministry of Foreign affairs to attempt to persuade the China-based
representatives of a foreign news organization to intervene in what the
ministry considered coverage of a "sensitive" topic by the organization
overseas. A correspondent of the news organization, who asked not to be
identified, told us, "The ministry officials said, 'We ask you to cancel this [coverage],'
but I told them what they were asking was illegal in my country, contrary to
articles of China's constitution, and also not allowed by our company."[39] The failure to heed this foreign ministry
directive resulted in the foreign news organization being penalized with a work
visa denial.[40]

The foreign
ministry reprimands suggest that the Chinese government is reacting to news
coverage judged unfavorable by the government in an effort to prevent similar
reporting in future. With the government's capacity to proactively and overtly
prevent such reporting at least slightly tempered by the temporary regulations,
foreign ministry reprimands appear to have become a fallback position for the
Chinese government to intimidate foreign correspondents whose coverage
displeases them. The ministry's choice of targets for the reprimands is also
revealing in that the majority of those called in are representatives of
relatively small media outlets that arguably lack the heft and savvy that major
US
media, including The New York Times
and The Washington Post, could
probably deploy to counter any intimidation moves by the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs.

Such actions
violate the Chinese government's temporary regulations on freedom for foreign
correspondents and may spell potential trouble for the thousands of journalists
representing media of all types and sizes who will come to China to cover the 2008 Beijing
Olympic Games. The Chinese government should disavow such tactics, enforce the
temporary regulations, and move toward full and permanent reporting freedoms
for foreign and Chinese journalists alike.

China's government still requires official permission
for journalists to report from Tibet,
a region with a long history of Chinese repression, despite the new regulations.
Human Rights Watch is aware of two foreign correspondents having been called to
the foreign ministry in May 2007 due to its objections to both the content of
their reporting of a visit to Tibet
and the fact that they had failed to get the requisite local government
permission to visit the region.[41]

McClatchy
Newspapers' China correspondent Tim Johnson, one of the two foreign
correspondents concerned, wrote later on his blog that the ministry's move was
"likely a signal to foreign journalists in general to watch their step
on Tibet matters."[42]

[The ministry official] noted I had recently been to Tibet
and read aloud from a sheet in front of him containing excerpts from a recent
article I had written. He noted that I did not have permission to travel to Tibet
as a journalist but did so against regulations. He said that I affirmed in an
article that foreign reporters are generally allowed in Tibet just once a year, and that China's
policy is repressive toward Tibetans. He made some other general comments and
summed up by saying that my writings were not true and "unacceptable" to the
Chinese government.[43]

IV. Harassment of
Foreign Correspondents' Chinese
Staff and Sources

I won't do
stories about forced evictions anymore because there is a chance that there
will be thugs there and I will be beaten. I will be the Chinese guy [with a
foreign reporter], so I'll be a target.

-Chinese
assistant to a foreign correspondent, Beijing,
June 12, 2007

The Chinese
assistants, researchers, and translators of foreign correspondents are uniquely
vulnerable to reprisals from official and non-official agents. Because their
work involves the pursuit of stories that are often classified as taboo for
domestic journalists, work on those topics often attracts the interest of state
security officials who regularly call them in to question them or their
employers.[44]

A potent lesson of the dangers faced by Chinese assistants to foreign
correspondents is the case of Zhao Yan, a researcher for The New York Times in Beijing
who is serving a three-year prison sentence that runs to September 2007 after
being convicted of fraud. His case was marred by multiple violations of due
process and there are concerns that his conviction was politically motivated.[45]

One local
assistant of a Beijing-based foreign correspondent has become the target of
tightening surveillance and pressure from at least two security organs of the
Chinese government, the Public Security Bureau and the National Security
Bureau, following the publication of a story about dissident couple Hu Jia and
Zeng Jinyan. Agents of the two bureaus monitoring the assistant have openly
argued in his presence about which agency should have jurisdiction in his case.
Pressure from those agencies has even extended to members of the assistant's
family. The correspondent described his assistants experience to us:

Several times the security agents asked [the assistant] for
lunch, for coffee, for tea. The security agents were friendly, not threatening,
and said, "It's your responsibility to let us know if you and you boss do [coverage
of] anything sensitive." They kept calling him back for meetingsthen they
started calling his family, his parentsand asked for his registration
information, confirmed where he lives and informed him of the job he does.
After that, he became very upset.[46]

The security forces did not make
any explicit threats to the family of the correspondent's assistant, but a call
from such agencies to a family carries a heavy implicit warning of potential
legal troubles. The correspondent said that his assistant has now become
extremely sensitive to any perceived surveillance, electronic or otherwise, by
the security agencies of his movements and his news gathering activities. The
assistant has also asked to be allowed to avoid doing stories that may involve
potential violent demonstrations, the correspondent said.

The Chinese assistants, researchers and translators of foreign
correspondents run particularly high risks of harassment and intimidation while
outside of major urban areas in pursuit of stories considered "sensitive" by
the Chinese government. The Chinese staff of foreign correspondents are often
questioned and criticized by security officials who question their "patriotism"
for working for a foreign correspondent. For example, an assistant of one
Beijing-based foreign correspondent said, "I was told [by security officials]
that 'you are a Chinese, you must take your side.'"[47]

Bruno Philip of Le Monde said that when he was detained
along with his Chinese assistant while covering the aftermath of riots in
Guangxi province in May 2007 (see Chapter III.C, above), the police tried to
separate the two in order to interrogate his assistant in an adjoining room.
Philip, fearing for the assistant's safety, had to forcefully insist that he
wouldn't allow her to be interrogated outside of his presence.

Numerous foreign
correspondents expressed concerns that the new temporary regulations for
reporting freedom for foreign journalists will prompt government officials,
police, and plainclothes thugs to place greater pressure on reporters'
potential sources to prevent them from speaking to the media. "In light of the
new rules, [the Chinese government] can't stop us from talking to anyone, so
they intimidate the subjects [of our reporting] rather than intimidating the
reporters," Sipa Press photographer Natalie Behring said.[48] One of the Henan HIV/AIDS village sources
of James Miles, China correspondent for the Economist,
has been given the vague warning by local officials he would have to "bear the
consequences" if he speaks to more journalists in the future, Miles told Human
Rights Watch. [49]

The potential
dangers faced by the local sources of foreign correspondents is a de facto
impediment to true reporting freedom in China despite the temporary
regulations, a veteran Beijing-based foreign correspondent told Human Rights
Watch:

The main issue
isn't the [foreign] reporters, but what happens to the [local] people you talk
to. The [temporary] rules give us much greater latitude to seek information and
to oppose those who try to oppose our reporting, but how does that mesh with
local rules in which people can be intimidated and detained for contact with
western media?[50]

Such tactics are
a capricious abuse of power against Chinese citizens, who are more vulnerable
than foreign journalists to government reprisals against coverage judged
unfavorable by the government.

V. Harassment, Intimidation and Censorship of Chinese Journalists

Local thugs are
more "polite" to foreigners and also foreign reporters can just be expelled [from
China].
If something really bad happens and if I get into some [political] power
struggle [via my reporting] without knowing it and they need a scapegoat, I
could be it.

-Chinese
journalist, Beijing,
June 20, 2007

Chinese
journalists are explicitly excluded from the freedoms granted to their foreign
counterparts under the new temporary regulations. The Chinese journalists
interviewed by Human Rights Watch said that their activities remain closely
monitored by state security agencies to ensure that their reporting does not
stray from that of the official propaganda line. Despite the explicit
guarantees of press freedom in Article 35 of China's constitution, the ongoing
failure to respect this freedom puts Chinese journalists, who attempt to expose
truths about society that the Chinese government prefers to keep hidden, under
threat of sanctions ranging from demotion and dismissal to detention and
prosecution. While there are courageous Chinese journalists who persistently
test the Chinese government's narrow boundaries for media expression, they are
constantly at risk of punitive action from state security organs whose
reactions to reporting of sensitive topics is as unpredictable as it is
arbitrary.

The editorial
content of Chinese print, radio, and television media is dictated by weekly
faxes from the government's official Publicity Department (formerly titled the Propaganda
Department in English), which explicitly delineates taboo topics. Those taboo
topics usually refer to issues considered highly sensitive and potentially
disruptive but which fall under the dangerously vague rubric of issues
affecting "social stability," such as unrest in Tibet
and Xinjiang, or coverage of Taiwan
or prominent dissidents. Those guidelines strictly determine editorial content.[51]

Already in 2007
the Chinese government has hit at the popular magazines Commoner and Lifeweek
through measures including mass transfers of their reporters and editors to
other publications after the two magazines covered "sensitive" topics including
official corruption in the countryside and events during the 1966-76 Cultural
Revolution period.[52] Chinese journalists interviewed by Human
Rights Watch said that official sensitivity to reporting deemed unflattering or
undermining of social stability poses an increasing threat ahead of the 17th
Congress of the Chinese Communist Party in October 2007 and the 2008 Olympic
Games. One journalist also observed, "Reporting
of 'sensitive issues' can be problematic, like riots, protests, detentions and
dissidents[and] the reporting environment could get worse after the Olympics [because]
2009 is the twentieth anniversary of 6/4 [the 1989 Tiananmen Massacre] and it's
the 60th anniversary of the Chinese Communist Party's founding."[53]

Those fears
appear justified in the light of a draft law unveiled in June 2006, which bars Chinese
journalists from reporting on "sudden incidents" without permission and calls
for fines up to the equivalent of US$12,500 for unauthorized reports on
incidents including social disturbances, natural disasters, and outbreaks of
disease.[54] China's vice-minister of the legislative
affairs office of China's State Council, or cabinet, Wang Yongqing, said in
July 2006 that the draft law should apply equally to foreign journalists: "I
think [foreign journalists] should be included, the same as if a Chinese
reporter goes to France or Britain, he also has to abide by your laws," Wang told
reporters.[55] However Chinese state media reported in
June 2007 that a review of the draft law that month by the 28th
Session of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress excised the
references to reporting of emergencies "without authorization."[56]

That draft law
underlines how the Chinese government reflexively prioritizes secrecy in
legislation related to media and information dissemination, rather than the
public's right to know.

The Chinese
government's new "Regulations on Government Information Openness,"
approved in January 2007, are a telling example of how even legislation overtly
designed to ease the flow of information to the public is handicapped by
official secrecy concerns. The "Regulations on Government Information Openness"
allow officials to block the release of any information judged to be secret or
that might "threaten national, public or economic security or social stability."[57]
Unfortunately, Chinese authorities have a track record of interpreting these
standards in both a sweeping and arbitrary fashion, making disclosure more the
exception than the rule.

"Press freedoms
are in many ways looser and the freedom to report is in some ways wider outside
the prohibited topics, but there's this gray zone that always leaves you
guessing about what's acceptable," a Chinese journalist told us. Running afoul
of the authorities in that editorial "gray zone" can result in censorship and
official sanctions against them and their publication, the reporter said.[58]

There is already
pressure on certain Chinese reporters who have garnered a reputation for
artfully inhabiting the "gray zone" while producing stories on contentious
social issues that the mainstream media either avoids, or dispenses in
carefully concocted prose tailored by the Publicity Department. Colleagues of
one such journalist warned Human Rights Watch against contacting the reporter,
explaining that the journalist's reporting had already gained the attention of
state security personnel and had resulted in several meetings between the
reporter and police. "[That journalist] is probably being closely monitored, so
any meeting with someone from a foreign human rights organization could be very
dangerous for her," a colleague said.[59]

The Chinese
government's targeting of local journalists who broach taboo subjects, or who
through accident or design find themselves on the wrong side of the "gray zone"
of permitted/prohibited reporting, during a time period in which it has
promised foreign journalists a measure of temporary reporting freedom, is
blatantly cynical and discriminatory. It runs against the spirit of the Olympic
Games for which the rule was implemented. China needs real media freedom, not
tightly scripted propaganda notes or occasional relaxations of normal reporting
restrictions, for both foreign and local journalists. The Chinese government
pledged that it would ensure such freedoms as a condition of hosting the 2008
Olympic Games in Beijing.
The real job of the Chinese government should be facilitating those freedoms
and making them permanent for all journalists, not undermining them.

VI.
Recommendations

To the Chinese Government

Ensure
that all elements of China's
government bureaucracy and security services are fully informed about the new
temporary regulations for foreign journalists' reporting rights, and that those
agencies fully understand their obligations in honoring the regulations.

Sponsor
a nationwide public education campaign on the temporary regulations for foreign
journalists' reporting rights to ensure that ordinary Chinese are aware that
during the period of the temporary regulations they can legally consent to be
interviewed by foreign reporters.

Punish
government and security officials who refuse to honor the temporary regulations
and impede, obstruct, harass, or detain foreign journalists in the course of
legal reporting activities in China.

Lift
restrictions on foreign journalists' access to and reporting from the Tibet
Autonomous Region.

Make
the "temporary" regulations a permanent component of Chinese law and extend the
same rights to Chinese journalists in line with Article 35 of China's
constitution.

Cease
the surveillance, harassment, and intimidation of the Chinese staff of foreign
correspondents and their sources by government and security officials as well
as plainclothes thugs.

Create
a formal mechanism for foreign journalists to report instances of harassment,
detention and intimidation and identify foreign ministry staffers empowered to
intervene who can be contacted 24 hours a day, seven days a week when such
cases occur.

Cease
the practice of designating dozens of topics as "sensitive" such that they
cannot be covered by Chinese journalists. Determine what is sensitive in
accordance with international practice, and periodically review the topics.

Abolish
legal ambiguities that threaten the freedom of Chinese journalists including
prohibitions on reporting that "threatens the honor or interests of the
nation."

Cease
the practice of formal reprimands by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of foreign
correspondents whose reporting merely touches on "sensitve" topics that the
Chinese government would prefer the media didn't cover.

To the International Olympic Committee (IOC)

Urge
the Chinese government to honor its agreement to the IOC by fully implementing
the temporary regulations on reporting freedoms for foreign journalists.

Urge
the Chinese government to make media freedom a permanent component of Chinese law for both foreign and Chinese
journalists beyond the October 17, 2008, deadline for the temporary regulations
for foreign correspondents.

Document and publicize cases in which
foreign and/or Chinese journalists are illegally harassed, intimidated, and
detained, and demand that the Chinese government fully investigate and
prosecute individuals found guilty of such crimes.

To National Governments Sending Olympic Teams to
the 2008 Beijing Olympics

Demand that the Chinese government ensure
the safety and legal reporting freedoms of media personnel from their country who
cover the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing.

Document and publicize cases in which
media personnel from their country are illegally harassed, intimidated, and
detained, and demand that the Chinese government fully investigate and
prosecute any individuals found guilty of such crimes.

Urge the Chinese government to make media
freedom a permanent component of Chinese law for both foreign and Chinese
journalists beyond the October 17, 2008 deadline for the expiry of the
temporary regulations for foreign correspondents.

To International News Organizations Planning to
Cover the 2008 Beijing Olympics

Document
and publicize cases in which accredited reporters, photographers, cameramen/camerawomen,
as well as foreign and Chinese support staff from their organizations are
harassed, intimidated, or detained in the course of legal reporting activities
in China,
and demand that the Chinese government fully investigate and prosecute any
individuals found guilty of such crimes.

Urge the Chinese government to make media
freedom a permanent component of Chinese law for both foreign and Chinese
journalists beyond the October 17, 2008 deadline for the expiry of the
temporary regulations for foreign correspondents.

Acknowledgements

This report was edited by Brad
Adams, executive director for the Asia Division of Human
Rights Watch; Sophie Richardson,
advocacy director for the Asia Division and Ian
Gorvin, consultant in the Program Office. Dinah PoKempner, general counsel for Human Rights
Watch, provided legal review.

Human Rights Watch wishes to thank the C.E. and S.
Foundation, as well as a very generous anonymous donor, for their support.

Above all, thanks go to the many journalists who provided us
with their accounts, thus making this report possible.

Appendix I: Regulations
on Reporting Activities in China
by Foreign Journalists During the Beijing
Olympic Games and the Preparatory Period

(This is the official English-language version of a document
from an official Chinese government website).

2006/12/01

Article 1

These Regulations are formulated to facilitate reporting
activities carried out in accordance with the laws of the People's Republic
of China by foreign
journalists in China
to advance and promote the Olympic Spirit during the Beijing Olympic Games
and the preparatory period.

Article 2

These Regulations apply to reporting activities carried
out by foreign journalists covering the Beijing Olympic Games and related
matters in China
during the Beijing Olympic Games and the preparatory period.

The Beijing Olympic Games mentioned in the Regulations
refer to the 29th Olympic Games and the 13th Paralympic Games.

Article 3

Foreign journalists who intend to come to China
for reporting should apply for visas at Chinese embassies, consulates or
other visa-issuing institutions authorized by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
of China.

Foreign journalists who hold valid Olympic Identity and
Accreditation Cards and Paralympic Identity and Accreditation Cards are
entitled to multiple entries into the territory of the People's Republic of China
with visa exemption by presenting Olympic Identity and Accreditation Cards,
together with valid passports or other travel documents.

Article 4

Foreign journalists may bring a reasonable quantity of
reporting equipments into China
duty free for their own use. The aforementioned equipments should be shipped
out of China's
territory at the end of their reporting activities.

To bring into China reporting equipment duty
free for their own use, foreign journalists should apply for the Equipment
Confirmation Letter at Chinese embassies or consulates and present the
Equipment Confirmation Letter together with a J-2 visa when going through
customs inspection. Foreign journalists who hold Olympic Identity and
Accreditation Cards and Paralympic Identity and Accreditation Cards may
present the Equipment Confirmation Letter issued by the Organizing Committee
of the 29th Olympic Games when going through customs inspection.

Article 5

For reporting needs, foreign journalists may, on a
temporary basis, bring in, install and use radio communication equipment
after completing the required application and approval procedures.

Article 6

To interview organizations or individuals in China,
foreign journalists need only to obtain their prior consent.

Article 7

Foreign journalists may, through organizations providing
services to foreign nationals, hire Chinese citizens to assist them in their
reporting activities.

Article 8

The media guide for foreign journalists of the Beijing
Olympic Games shall be formulated by the Organizing Committee of the 29th Olympic
Games in accordance with these Regulations.

Article 9

These Regulations shall come into force as of 1 January
2007 and expire on 17 October 2008.

-Website of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of
the People's Republic of China,
http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/zxxx/t282169.htm

Appendix II: Implementation of the
Regulations on Reporting Activities in China
by Foreign Journalists during the Beijing
Olympic Games and the Preparatory Period

(This is the official English-language version of a document
from an official Chinese government website).

The implementation Period of the
Regulations on Reporting Activities By Foreign Journalists

The preparatory
period of the Beijing Olympic Games mentioned in the Regulations on Reporting Activities by Foreign Journalists refers
to a period from Jan. 1, 2007, when the Regulations
on Reporting Activities by Foreign Journalists came into force, to July 7,
2008, one month before the opening ceremony of the Games of the XXIX Olympiad.
The period of the Beijing Olympic Games refers to the Games-time from July 8,
2008, one month before the opening ceremony of the Games of the XXIX Olympiad,
to Oct. 17, 2008, one month after the closing ceremony of the XXIII Paralympic
Games.

Who is covered by the Regulation on
Reporting Activities By Foreign Journalists

The 'foreign
journalists' mentioned in the Regulations
on Reporting Activities by Foreign Journalists refers to resident foreign
journalists and foreign reporters in China for short-term news coverage,
including journalists of internet media organizations, freelancers, foreign
staff of Beijing Olympic Broadcasting Co. Ltd (BOB), holders of valid Olympic
Identity and Accreditation Cards (OIAC) for the Games of the XXIX Olympiad and
Paralympic Identity and Accreditation Cards (PIAC) for the XXIII Paralympic
Games issued under the authority of the International Olympic Committee (IOC)
and the International Paralympic Committee (IPC) respectively. These aforesaid
foreign journalists include employees of foreign rights-holding broadcasters,
accredited written and photographic press organizations for the Beijing Olympic
Games.

Applicable Scope of the Regulations on
Reporting Activities by Foreign Journalists

The Regulations on Reporting Activities by
Foreign Journalists shall apply to the coverage of the Beijing Olympic
Games and the preparation as well as political, economic, social and cultural
matters of China
by foreign journalists, in conformity with Chinese laws and regulations.

J-2

Visa Application Procedures

Foreign journalists
intending to come to China
to report or prepare for their coverage of the Beijing Olympic Games should
apply for visas at Chinese embassies, consulates or other visa-issuing
institutions authorized by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic
of China
(MFA).

How to Go Through Customs Clearance for
Reporting Equipment Carried with Foreign Journalists for their Own Use

Foreign journalists
may bring a reasonable quantity of reporting equipment into China for their own use free of
duty. The aforementioned equipment should be taken out of China's territory after their
reporting activities are finished.

How to Temporarily Import, Install and
Use Radio Communication Equipment by Foreign Journalists

During the Beijing
Olympic Games and the preparatory period, foreign journalists may, on a
temporary basis, bring in, install and use radio communication equipment needed
for their reporting, after completing the required application and approval
procedures in conformity with Chinese laws and regulations.

Interviews Conducted by Foreign
Journalists

To interview
organizations or individuals in China,
foreign journalists need only to obtain the prior consent of such organizations
or individuals.

Travel of Foreign Journalists in China

Foreign journalists
with valid visas or certificates, the same as any other traveler, may freely
travel to places open to foreigners designated by the Chinese Government.

How to Employ Chinese Citizens to Assist
in Reporting Activities by Foreign Journalists

[24]The
Letters and Visits system, colloquially called shangfang ("appealing to higher
levels"), is a complaints system allowing citizens to report grievances to
authorities, who are then supposed to instruct other government departments to
resolve the problems. Human Rights Watch, China - We Could Disappear at Any
Time: Retaliation and Abuses against Chinese Petitioners, December 8, 2005,
hrw.org/reports/2005/china1205/.

[48]
Human Rights Watch interview with Natalie Behring, June 14, 2007. In fact,
instances of direct harassment and
intimidation towards the
Chinese sources of foreign journalists are not a new phenomenon since the
temporary regulations: Fu Xiancai, an outspoken advocate for villagers
displaced for the Three Gorges Dam project, was severely beaten by an unknown
assailant on June 8, 2006, after local police questioned him about his
interview with German television station ARD. See "Chinese Activist Said
Paralyzed by Assault," Associated Press, June 13, 2006.

[49]Human Rights Watch interview with James
Miles, China Correspondent for the Economist,
Beijing, June 21,
2007.